The supply chain in China, including thousands of mainland factories, is reeling from a 13.6% increase in the minimum wage, as reported yesterday by CNBC. As a result, the lowest salary is being pushed up to 1,500 yuan or $240 per month. The increase was caused by a series of strikes that occurred around the Pearl River Delta, a major Chinese industrial center.

Chinese export manufacturers in the Hong Kong area expect that the increase will result in the downsizing—or complete closing—of 1/3 of Hong Kong’s 50,000 factories in China. These suppliers are critical links in the supply chain that stretches all the way from China to Europe and the U.S. In addition to the wage increase, another reason for the anticipated decline in Chinese production relates to the general downturn in global economic activity.

The gap between U.S. labor costs and Chinese labor costs is narrowing. In fact, a recent article in the New York Times described how GE is bringing back jobs to the U.S. at GE’s Appliance Park in Louisville, KY. In return, the union agreed to a two-tier labor structure, where the U.S. employees who are hired will be paid $10 to $15 per hour less than what the current union workers are making.

Let’s do the math. The offshore jobs that are being backsourced to GE’s Appliance Park will result in U.S. workers making between $20,000 to $38,000 per year. The workers in China, who will receive the 13.6% increase in their minimum wages, will be making $2,880 per year. Thus, G.E.’s workers will be paid approximately 700 to 1,300 per cent more than their Chinese counterparts. Jeffrey Immelt, GE’s CEO, is spearheading the U.S. government’s campaign to bring jobs back to the U.S. Are these new, Appliance Park jobs being brought back because of lower labor costs? Or, are political factors affecting the decision?

As discussed in an interview with a U.S. manufacturing executive who lived in China for 13 years, global manufacturers who are looking to minimize their labor costs are locating factories in Viet Nam, not China. This strategy—chasing every cent of labor savings—requires rejiggering the supply chain every few years. Vietnam’s minimum wage is only US$85 per month (or $1,020 per year). Thus, Chinese workers are paid 282% more than Vietnamese workers.

Although the labor differential gap between the U.S. and Asian countries is narrowing, it is still significant. Offshoring will continue to be attractive to firms with products that have

High labor content

Large Production volumes

Low variety

Low transportation costs

Products that meet these criteria—such as electronics assembly—will most likely never return to the U.S. Furthermore, in certain industries—for example, in computer and cell phone production—most of the companies that comprise the supply chain are situated in Asia. Given this reality, moving production to the U.S. would be uneconomical. In these industries, hoping for backsourcing to happen is like waiting for an airplane to touch down that is simply not going to land [on U.S. shores].

In conclusion, the key determinant in terms of where to produce is based on total cost, not just labor cost. One must begin by looking at the manufacturing process to determine where the most economical location is. Although China’s increase in its minimum wage is significant, it is just one of many factors to consider.

What do you think? Is there a future for manufacturing in the U.S.? Given the labor differential between China and the U.S., do you think that we can still compete?

There is a glaring lack of ethics in terms of Apple’s supply chain management practices, as suggested by the New York Times. Many Asian suppliers are violating basic ethical principles. Here are some of the questionable practices cited:

Horrendous occupational safety violations

High suicide rates due to stressful working conditions

Long working hours: repetitive 60-hour, 7-day weeks

Employment of children as young as 15 years-old

Although Apple has responded to problems in its Asian supplier base by conducting supplier audits, the worlds’ largest company—in terms of stock market value—has been reluctant to put its foot down. The fate of a 22 year-old college graduate, Lai Xiaodong, is a case in point. He moved to Chengdu in southwest China to take a job at Foxconn, an electronics supplier that employs 1,000,000 people. He was quickly promoted to oversee a team that polished iPad cases. This process generated dust, which is a known safety hazard. Mr. Lai and 3 teammates died from a ghastly explosion, which also injured 14 other workers. After the accident, which seared 90% of Mr. Lai’s body, Apple contacted “the foremost safety experts in process safety,” and assembled a team to make recommendations to prevent future accidents. In December, 2011—7 months after Mr. Lai was killed—another iPad factory exploded due to aluminum dust. As a result, 59 workers were injured; and 23 hospitalized.

I was initially shocked after reading about the story of Mr. Lai, and Apple’s apparent lack of commitment to correcting poor worker-safety practices. Although allowing unnecessary accidents—resulting in worker injuries and deaths—cannot be condoned, we must take a more nuanced view regarding Apple’s predicament, from both a historical and cultural perspective.

In a supply chain management class that I recently taught, we discussed the ethics associated with the use of child labor in developing countries. One of my students grew up in India. He indicated that poverty in India is severe, and compulsory education is not mandated by law. To survive in this environment, some families require that their children work. Were we to impose our ethical values and prevent children from working in Indian factories, we would be depriving Indian families of sorely needed income. It is easy—but wrong-headed—to believe that our ethics and moral values are superior to the moral values held by other societies.

The reasons against using child labor are not moral as much as they are practical ones. It is bad business to permit children to build Apple’s products, if young people are simply being used as a means to an end. Consumers in the west will no longer think that it is “cool” to own i-Phones, if they have been built by Chinese teenagers. How many parents would want to be part of a 21st scene, taken from a 19th century Dicken’s novel?

In Viet Nam, Nike has implemented an innovative solution to this dilemma. Although some of Nike’s Vietnamese suppliers employ children, they also provide employees with a regular wage, free or subsided meals, free medical services and training and education. Nike, as well as western consumers, benefit from low labor costs. At the same time, the workers improve their standard of living and also receive access to education.

Regarding the various safety issues that were described by the New York Times, one has to put them into a cultural context. I recently interviewed an executive who lived in China for 13 years, setting up factories and growing American businesses. During the course of our conversation, he made the point that public safety is non-existent. When walking down the street, you have to always be on the lookout for possible hazards. There may be a big hole in front of you, which is not blocked off with barriers. Or, there could be an electrical wire dangling at eye-level. If unaware, you could walk right into it. If a lack of public safety is the norm in China, how can one expect the private sector to be any different? Would we be correct to impose our ethical standards—as relates to public safety—onto the Chinese? Specifically, should we preach that barriers should be placed in front of Shanghai’ s sinkholes?

Getting back to Apple, from a business perspective, the company must enforce strict, safety practices for all of its suppliers; otherwise, more articles—such as today’s scathing indictment in the New York Times—will appear, tarnishing Apple’s brand. Only by adding teeth to Apple’s supplier responsibility reports and recommendations, will the company avoid future, public relations disasters.

In conclusion, with global competition, superior supply chain management results in consumers receiving products at low prices. But our western ethical tastes are repulsed at stories of worker abuse. Apple must take strong, corrective measures against suppliers who use workers solely as the means to an end, namely, achieving low, production costs. In supply chain management, good ethics makes for good business.

Interview with James L Waite who set-up factories and grew American businesses in China

___________________________________

Interview byTIM MOJONNIER

____________________________________

You lived in China for 13 years. When did you live there? I arrived in January 1997 and returned to the U.S. in November 2010, with occasional trips back to the U.S. During my time in China, I spent 8 years in the Shanghai area, and the balance in the south, Guangdong area.

What was it like living in China for all those years? What were the biggest challenges in adapting to the local culture? Initially, my wife and I felt uncomfortable going into the streets, and shopping by ourselves. Because we were foreigners, the prices were higher and the Chinese way is to negotiate for everything. We also had to acclimatize ourselves to being long term expatriates (expats). Most expats typically live in a country for 2-3 year assignments. Since we lived in China for over a decade, we always had to make new friends. In addition, dealing with a translator was a challenge, because the translator would just translate the words, but not the meaning. Furthermore, the Chinese do not always speak their mind, and they do not speak directly. After being there several years we were able to understand the meaning of Chinese conversations. We also learned how to communicate basic things and feel comfortable shopping in local open air markets and moving with the flow in the crowded streets. In conclusion, once we got over the initial shock of living in a different culture, we realized that the Chinese are a warm people, who enjoyed being around Americans, in part because it provides them with an opportunity to practice their English. Chinese business people are all educated and very smart. It was a pleasure working with them, and we have developed many friends who visit us when they pass through Chicago.

What did you do before you lived in China? After graduating from the university, I worked in the Chicago area for 7 years in construction and design engineering. Later, I held manufacturing management positions such as V.P. Manufacturing and General Manager. I was employed in industries that produced air pollution control equipment, pumps, industrial testing equipment, laboratory testing equipment, etc.

What did you do during your stay there? I had three primary engagements.First, I managed a joint venture between an American ball valve manufacturer and a Chinese company. The assignment entailed overseeing the relationship between the two organizations as well as running the business. Second, for Sloan Valve Co., a global manufacturer and distributor of flush valves and faucets for high end commercial buildings, I developed a business plan that described a strategy to enter the Chinese market selling American products in the China market. The plan was funded, and I started up the operation in China, where I worked for 6 years. Third, I worked for Weber-Stephens, establishing a supply chain management company. The focus was on finding suppliers, qualifying suppliers, and monitoring their performance. I traveled to many places in China for all 3 companies, and gained an understanding of what products are made in various locations and the Chinese customs to do business.

Given ever increasing levels of inflation and local labor rates as well as the appreciation of the Renminbi, is China still an attractive country to outsource production to? If so, why? $1.90 per hour is the highest Provence minimum wage (Guangdong Providence), which includes all of the employer costs to put an employee on board. However, the City of Shenzhen recently announced increases for the minimum wage effective starting Feb. 2012 = $2.17/hour including burden. Skilled Chinese workers can command more. Still, outsourcing work to China provides a manufacturer with significant labor savings, but you need to have the correct strategy for why you are doing business in China. Companies trying to penetrate the local market have the best opportunity. The Chinese like western products; they desire the things and life style we have. Look at Apple’s phones; they had a sale on their latest model and the demand was so great that they cancelled the sale, and shut shops down. Demand for these types of products is unbelievable. But outsourcing labor-intensive work to China—while developing channels to enter the local Chinese market—is not an easy thing to do. However, the return can be great. Finally, if you are only focused on reducing labor costs, then outsourcing work to places like Viet Nam may be a better option. However, this strategy involves chasing a few cents savings and moving to new factories or new vendors every few years.

What are the main challenges associated with running a business in China? That’s a big question. It depends on whether you are just sourcing components from China or making product for the local Chinese market. If you are only manufacturing and exporting, then quality is especially important. Also, retaining good employees is always a challenge, especially given wage inflation. Pirating good employees is an issue. You need to have cultural sensitivity, understanding what people expect from an employer. Having a first-rate Human Resources policy and activity is important in order to retain good employees. Also, it is very difficult for small manufacturers. The Chinese think that bigger is better. They believe that it is better to work for a big company, which is especially an issue when dealing with the government. The bigger the company, the greater the likelihood that officials will work with you. If you are a small guy, it is difficult to attract their attention.

What are the main opportunities associated with running a business in China? For the years 2007, 2008, and 2009, the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai and Booz & Co. conducted a survey of about 1,000 manufacturers to understand why they came to China. The following is a list of the major reasons, ranked from most important to least important:

83%: Access to the local Chinese market

66%: Labor cost savings

51%: Access to the broader Asian market—having a business in China provides you withthe ability to export to other Asian countries without import duties

44%: Material savings

41%: Strategic move against key global competitors

In November 2011, you returned to China for a month. How have things changed since you were last there? Previously, China put a lot of effort in infrastructure projects, but at the time I left, there was a downturn in this activity. I was surprised to see a great amount of construction still going on. Housing prices are finally coming down, enabling the middle class to buy their own apartments. Business in general is just booming; people are busy, hustling, you can just feel the energy in the streets. You don’t feel that here [in the U.S.] at all. Nevertheless, the Chinese business people are concerned. Previously, the economy was growing at a 10 % clip, but it has slowed to 7% projected GDP growth in 2012. However, the government is committed and will make the 7% growth happen. Inflation has increased, and there is concern about an anticipated leadership change in the highest levels of government.

What does your firm do?

Ops-Asia helps businesses to be successful in Asia and/or the U.S. We focus on small to mid-sized companies that don’t have the resources to do this type of activity. The primary market segments served are industrial products, building materials, household appliances & automotive components. We assist firms in 4 areas: business development, operations competitiveness, project management, and supply chain management.♦

____________________________________________

James L. Waite is President of Ops-Asia, which has offices in Shanghai, China and Northbrook, IL

“The dwarf sees farther than the giant, when he has the giant’s shoulder to mount on.”—Samuel Taylor Coleridge, in The Friend (1828)

Every business executive and aspiring entrepreneur should read Steve Jobs, a biography by Walter Issacson. It provides a frank, unadulterated look at the career of the greatest business executive in our time. Consider this. Job’s founded Apple in 1976, which began as a 4-person operation in his father’s garage. By 2011, it became the world’s most valuable company by market capitalization. I agree with Isaacson’s contention that Jobs belongs right up there in the pantheon next to Ford and Edison.

There are many takeaways from this book. One of the “lessons learned” is that Jobs stood on the shoulders of others in order to achieve his phenomenal success. We all need mentors, and Steve Jobs needed them more than most. Given up for adoption by his biological parents, he spent much of his life looking for a father figure who he could emulate:

Personal Role Models

Paul R. Jobs, his adoptive father, who enjoyed refurbishing and selling used cars after work. Steve spent hours by his father’s side, “eager to hangout with his dad.” Job’s dad was the first person to provide him with exposure to electronics. And the rest is history.

Kobun Chino, a Soōtoō Zen master, who served as Steve Job’s spiritual guru. Job’s longtime teacher presided at Job’s wedding. For Jobs, Zen represented more than a philosophy of life; it also infused his thinking about design, which he felt ought to embrace beauty, minimalism and simplicity.

Business Role Models

Arthur Rock, a venture capitalist and early Apple Board member, took Jobs under his wing. However, the relationship was about more than just business. “Arthur had been like a father to me,” said Jobs. Rock and his wife Toni hosted Jobs in Aspen and San Francisco. He also taught Jobs about opera.

Mike Markkula, Jr., an angel investor and Board member of Apple, was the third employee of the company. Like Rock, he also became a father figure to Jobs. Markkula taught Jobs how to market, sell and package a product. Markkula oversaw Jobs growth and maturation. He served as Apple’s CEO from 1981 to 1983.

Ironically, Rock and Markkula eventually distanced themselves from Jobs. Here is the story. In 1983, Jobs recruited and hired John Sculley, President of PersiCo, to become Apple’s CEO. Two years later, Jobs had second thoughts. He and Sculley had a showdown before Apple’s Board of Directors. Both Rock and Markkula sided with Sculley. Years later, in recounting this event, Jobs broke down in tears. He felt betrayed by his business father-figures, much in the same way that he felt abandoned at birth by his biological father.

We all need shoulders to stand on, particularly during the formative phases of our careers. The poet John Donne said it best: “No man is an island.”

At the age of 16, I was inspired by Dr. Winters, a visiting minister who had a daytime job as a consultant to G.M. He was an outstanding speaker, and imparted numerous, fundamental life-lessons. He piqued my curiosity about business. Many years later, I worked with an external company consultant, A.K. His ideas brought about significant changes within the organization where I was employed. From him, I learned about the power of ideas, and how to present them well. As a result, my career direction changed from management to consulting.

What are your passions? Do you have a coach/mentor/boss/friend who you can learn from? Whose shoulders are you standing on in order to achieve the goals that you seek?

There are not enough jobs for college graduates whose degrees are in non-STEM areas. STEM stands for skills in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. I know, because as a university professor and parent, I have learned about the predicaments of many young graduates. The plight of Tom K. is a case in point. He graduated from Dartmouth with a degree in history, but the only decent-paying job that he could find was one in construction. Last year’s valedictorian from one of the top 25 law schools is still looking for work, according to a lawyer friend.

These anecdotal stories are buttressed by a report from Georgetown University, Center on Education and the Workforce. The authors project that by 2018, only 23% of jobs will require a bachelor’s degree, and 10% will require a graduate degree. Put differently, 67% of jobs in 2018 will not require a college or graduate degree.

Vocational and Technical School IT Training Class

In short, we are producing far too many college graduates who are finding that the job market has little use for them. To add insult to injury, the typical college graduate is saddled with an average of $25,250 in student loans, a yoke that is heavy to bear. The combination of debt and dim job prospects have together provided the kindling that has ignited the “Occupy Wall Street Movement.”

Our current predicament is addressed in the report “Blueprint for Jobs in the 21st Century,” which was compiled by the Human Resource (HR) policy Association. The HR executives indicated that many good paying jobs are going unfilled, because our educational institutions and government training programs are producing workers who lacked the necessary, technical skills. In addition, the authors of the report indicate that we are gutting our high school vocational training programs, thereby exacerbating the problem.

For example, the New York Times reported that President Obama is prioritizing increasing academic standards and college graduation rates while reducing federal expenditures for vocational training in public high schools and community colleges. The objective to produce a higher percentage of college graduates is reminiscent of our previous public policy to increase the percentage of Americans who own homes. Is the administration unknowingly creating another bubble? Call it the bachelor degree bubble (too many B.A.s and not enough jobs) as opposed to the housing bubble (too many houses, and not enough viable buyers)?

Recommended Course of Action

What opportunities are there for the 67% who need training for work?

First, we must realize that having a bachelor’s degree is not a guarantee to a job, as it once was. We must create a strong vocational option for high school students, so that they can go on to develop the skills that are needed by future employers.

According to HR professionals, certain jobs are going “begging.” During a December 12, 2011 speech before the Economic Club of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, Chicago’s mayor, indicated that while the city struggles with a 10 percent unemployment rate, more than 100,000 jobs are available.

Skilled trades are always in constant demand. For example, AMR, an aircraft leasing company, indicated that it has 500 openings for aviation mechanics. Experienced mechanics can earn as much as $56,000 a year. Also, rewarding careers are available in occupations such as health care, information technology, etc.

But to develop the requisite skills in these fields, workers need education for jobs and/or apprenticeships. Earlier this week it was announced that the City Colleges of Chicago plans to provide vocational training to meet the needs of business in industries such as health care, and supply chain management.

Government, educational institutions and industry must work together to restructure the educational system. Only by doing so can young people acquire the requisite skills and training that employers seek. Developing these skills will enable youth to be able to earn a living wage, and achieve a productive career.

What is your view? Should we put resources into increasing the graduation rates for undergraduate degrees? Or should we put our resources into developing vocational and technical schools and/or career paths?